Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2008 Mar;18(3):592-9.
doi: 10.1007/s00330-007-0786-8. Epub 2007 Oct 2.

Radiation dose estimates in dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography

Affiliations

Radiation dose estimates in dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography

Paul Stolzmann et al. Eur Radiol. 2008 Mar.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to quantify radiation dose parameters of dual-source CT coronary angiography. Eighty patients underwent contrast-enhanced, retrospectively ECG-gated dual-source CT coronary angiography with heart rate-adapted ECG pulsing using two algorithms: In 40 patients, the tube current was reduced to 20% (A(min1)) of the normal tube current (A(max)) outside the pulsing window; in 40 patients tube current was reduced to 4% (A(min2)) of A(max). Mean CTDI(vol) in the A(min1) group was 45.1 +/- 3.6 mGy; the mean CTDI(vol) in the A(min2) group was 39.1 +/- 3.2 mGy, with CTDI(vol) in the A(min2) group being significantly reduced when compared to the A(min1) group (P < 0.001). A significant negative correlation was found between CTDI(vol) and heart rate in group A(min1) (r = -0.82, P < 0.001), whereas no correlation was found between CTDI(vol) and heart rate in group A(min2) (r = -0.066). Using the conversion coefficient for the chest, dual-source CT coronary angiography resulted in an estimated mean effective dose of 8.8 mSv in the A(min1) group and 7.8 mSv in the A(min2). Radiation exposure of dual-source CT coronary angiography using an ECG-pulsing protocol reducing the tube current to 20% significantly decreases with increasing heart rates, despite using wider pulsing windows at higher heart rates. When using a protocol with reduced tube current of 4%, the radiation dose is significantly lower, irrespective of the heart rate.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Eur Radiol. 2006 Jul;16(7):1409-15 - PubMed
    1. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006 May 2;47(9):1840-5 - PubMed
    1. Health Phys. 2007 May;92(5):442-8 - PubMed
    1. Circulation. 2006 Mar 14;113(10):1305-10 - PubMed
    1. Radiology. 2007 Jun;243(3):775-84 - PubMed

Publication types